In a representative democracy, candidates present what they stand for, and then the voters choose who they think will best represent voter best interests. Does tax and spend sound good. Or does a secure border sound good.
But the whole basis of the democratic process is nullified if the candidates simply say what their internal polling says the majority wants, and then when elected ignore the campaign statements and rule according to their secret agenda.
This attack on democracy strategy is revealed when candidates reverse their positions to claim they hold the position that is polling best.
For example, first I was against fracking, but now I am for fracking.
Or first I wanted better enforcement of taxes on tips, but now I am for no taxes on tips.
Or first I carried a weapon in war, but now I carried no weapon in war. I misspoke.
But the whole basis of the democratic process is nullified if the candidates simply say what their internal polling says the majority wants, and then when elected ignore the campaign statements and rule according to their secret agenda.
This attack on democracy strategy is revealed when candidates reverse their positions to claim they hold the position that is polling best.
For example, first I was against fracking, but now I am for fracking.
Or first I wanted better enforcement of taxes on tips, but now I am for no taxes on tips.
Or first I carried a weapon in war, but now I carried no weapon in war. I misspoke.